Slashdot Mirror
Death March
Background Ed Yourdon has a long and storied publishing history, most notably for his books on structured design and his duology (is that a two book series?) Decline and Fall of the American Programmer and The Rise and Resurrection of the American Programmer. Of course, he's better known recently for his (somewhat apocalyptic) Y2K books. This one, of course, is a couple of years old, but like most of the books I tend to gravitate to, addresses themes that endure. In this case, the desire to do more with less. The Scenario
Death March: [A project] whose "project parameters" exceed the norm by at least 50%. [The metaphor is used to suggest] a "forced march" imposed upon relatively innocent victims, the outcome of which is usually a high casualty rate. (2)Yourdon's definition, as related above, does not necessarily imply a long-term project (although long-term death marches are worse than short-term ones), but instead describes a project with a low rate of success and a high personal impact. The project is either underfunded, underscheduled, understaffed, overfeatured, or some combination of the above. The introduction deals with the reasons DM projects happen, and why people actually agree to work on them. Having been on one myself, I can say that "ego" is one of the major reasons.
The subsequent chapters deal with various facets of the death march project, and how those facets are unique in such a project. Chapter 2, politics, has an especially interesting section on identifying what type of DM project one is on, and the chances of success for such a project. Yourdon rates projects on a four-quadrant scale: low and high likelihood of success, and low and high happiness factor (giving four combinations). Suffice to say, there are good combinations, bad combinations, and worse combinations. :-)
Chapter 3 deals with an important part of any project, but one that is hypercritical for any death march project: negotiation. Needless to say, good negotiation can turn a DM project into an almost-normal project, while bad negotiation can turn a bad situation into a nightmare. Yourdon provides some excellent tips on how to deal with upper management in these situations, which should be useful even if you've negotiated for a standard project before. Clearly, management is going to be much less forgiving in a DM situation.
Chapter 4 deals with "peopleware" issues in death march projects. As with negotiation, nothing really changes from a standard project to a DM project, but everything is emphasized. If you have poor workspace when you're on a normal deadline, consider how that workspace will affect you when you're under extreme time pressure. Overtime, and the limits of such, are another important issue Yourdon deals with.
Chapter 5 deals with an issue I've addressed many times in my reviews: process. I greatly appreciate Yourdon's take on process in a DM project. Simply put, while the Methodology Police will make any DM project worse, the lack of process will completely destroy one. Don't try to do all the paperwork while you're cramming to get the software out the door, but abandoning process will insure your failure. Things like requirements management and configuration management are all the more critical on a likely-to-fail project. If you lose only a week to a requirements change, that might be a quarter of your schedule!
Chapter 6, tools, simply reminds us that technology will not solve the human problem of programming. No CASE tool or supercompiler is going to come along to write your DM software for you. Use what you are most comfortable with, and you'll be the most productive.
The concluding chapter 7 proposes an interesting scenario: what if death march projects were to become normal? That is, how do you live and work rationally in an environment that is irrational? Suffice to say, this impacts everything about a software team, including the people who are hired and how careers advance within the company.
Throughout the book, Yourdon includes some excellent footnotes taken from correspondence with various software practitioners. These email excepts, gleaned from a questionnaire Yourdon sent out about the book's subject, give excellent insight into the nature of a death march project.
Although few people actually want to be sucked into a death march project, it will likely happen to most developers at some point in time or another. Being prepared for the occurrence might well mean your survival of such a project.
What's Bad/Good I found very little to dislike about this book. The text is concise yet thorough. The presentation is excellent. The ideas are reasonable and well-stated. I find Yourdon to be quite moderate in his position, neither justifying death marches nor railing against them overly. The advice on this book could easily be applied to any sort of project, and in fact is fairly standard in the literature, only ramped up for an intense, death march experience. Very little has changed in the industry since this book was initially published, and I doubt its timeliness will cease anytime soon. So What's In It For Me? If you write software, or work on any knowledge team, you will likely face a death march project at some point in your career. This book will help prepare you to deal with, and triumph over, such an experience. Table of Contents Preface- Introduction
- Politics
- Negotiations
- People in Death March Projects
- Processes
- Tools and Technology
- Death March as a Way of Life
Puchase this book from Fatbrain.com.
The Death March saps the energy of programmers. It increases the burn-out rate. It severely decreases the quality of the code. If the project survives, it's always because one or two "hero programmers" work their asses off writing untested spaghetti code that barely pushes the project into usefulness, not too far behind the deadline.
And we wonder why the software industry has such a wonderful reputation for quality.
There is a better approach, but it involves communication, something hackers can sometimes be bad at. You just have to learn how to push back. Start off with a good estimate. Make sure management knows it's only an estimate, and may change later. Drill this fact into them as a way of life, but at the same time, be _very_ inflexible that your estimate is the very best you can come up with at the moment, you're not going to chop a week off it just to fit in with a trade show.
If you're given an unreasonable demand, tell management it's unreasonable. If you think a job is going to take six months, say it'll take six months. Don't say three, and plan on overtime. Oh, and you're not Scotty. Don't say nine months, because next project, you'll have moved on, and _I_ will be left with a manager who expects miracles.
Keep track of how the project is going. Be as accurate as possible. Use some measurable criteria, don't just go around asking "how's it going?" Recently, one of the projects I'm working on slipped due to various problems - some our fault, some beyond our control. Because we'd laid the groundwork early, and because we were keeping close track of our progress, we could go to the project manager and say "Look, we're behind schedule. The new estimated shipping date is 'x'. This project won't sustain any more programmers, so if you want to ship earlier, you'll have to take out some functionality.
Phrase it like that, and you'll be amazed how reasonable people can be.
If you tell your project manager that you're behind schedule, and his response is "Work overtime", then go out the door and keep walking. This is the reason I left my last job, and I've never been happier as a result.
The result of avoiding death marches? Programmers are happy because there are fewer unreasonable demands. Management are happy because they feel they have control over the situation, and they don't get that feeling of palpable dread every time they go back into the cubicles and find everyone looking through job ads.
Charles Miller
--
The more I learn about the Internet, the more amazed I am that it works at all.
Theres always the "Mythical Man Month" another classic book that all software developers should read. You all probably have but hey someones got to mention it, and it really is still relevant today despite being over 25 years old!
;)
I'll probably get flamed for saying this but I read "The Project Survival Guide" by published by the evil empire and thought it was helpfull in expressing the disasters that can happen. Maybe that was because Micro$oft get more disasters than most
Seriously give it a read it may come from Micro$oft but like "Code Complete" its worth a read.
... who the hell can take this guy seriously?
Let's review his authoring history ... first, he writes a book ("...decline of the American ...") that basically says that programmers in America are dead, that "software factories" in Asia/Japan will replace all the domestic programmers, that COBOL programmers are dead and COBOL is a dead language ...
Then, he recants those assertions in "Rise of the American Programmer", and claims that Java and new web platforms have "rekindled" the American software programmers ... right before the dawn of Y2K hysteria, again, he pronounces the death of COBOL again ...
Now, the Y2K book where he sounds the FUD bell, and tells everyone to run to the hills, stock up on non-perishable rations, and build that bomb shelter kit ...
Granted, this work offers a perspective of failing software projects and I even read most of it once while browsing at a local B&N and some of the anecdotes were quite amusing ... but to spend a dime on this charlatan ... bleh ... how does this guy have any credibility whatsoever?
AZspot
I just finished working on the worst project of my career. I was brought in to replace the lead developer, who had quit w/o notice (I now understand why); I never had an adequate work environment (it's embarrassing to have to ask someone to print docs for you every day); and office politics resulted in half of my design decisions being overturned with little or no justification (my favorite: "No, we should put all of the source code in one directory, because cd-ing all over the place is too confusing."). But all that I could forgive, if it weren't for the process.
Every other Friday was a "freeze-date", where QA took whatever code we had, and did a test build for the users to pound on. However, every code change (new features, bug-fixes, updating database entries) had to be documented on seven paper documents (electronic was insufficient), requiring signatures from four-to-six managers, depending on severity (emergency fixes only required four docs and three sigs). The QA group was completely enamoured of itself, and somehow had acquired the authority to reject code that wasn't documented exactly as they specified, or documented, but the signatures weren't procured by the freeze date. Toward the end, someone in QA started rejecting code because it didn't meet requirements that didn't exist, but he felt really should. There was also the problem of the QA process changing without warning, but I've complained enough.
On some projects, the only thing that kept me coming back every Monday was the paycheck at the end of the week. That, and naive hope that eventually somebody would clue in and let us do our jobs in a meaningful way. A death march project is one that is being sabotaged by management in such a way that no amount of developer effort, passion, or enthusiasm will save it. The only thing that will save it is a dramatic change in management's understanding of the project's goals.
I don't know many programmers that are only in it for the money. The ones that are, I don't trust. As for the rest of us, yes, the rarity of our skills allows us to garner huge paychecks, but we're in it for the programming.
Give a sculptor a hundred bucks and a bucket of clay to work with and he'll be happy; give him a thousand bucks and a bucket of moist shit, and he'll usually walk. In analogous circumstances, most self-respecting programmers will, too.
So if you give me a project that's doomed, don't accuse me of cynicism when I act like I know it. And if you think the troops are responsible for their own low morale, your project's collapse is inevitable.
--
This is not my sandwich.
Stay tuned for The Fluctuation of The American Programmer to round out the trilogy.
And of course, don't forget the fourth book in the trilogy: So Long and Thanks for all the Mountain Dew.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Yes, but can it tell us how to deal with the most impossible dadline of them all:
"What the hell did you do to the car?!"
Obliteracy: Words with explosions